Pakistan Army Sidesteps Civilian Government in Afghan Policy: Recent hostilities between Pakistan and Afghanistan have laid bare the deep-rooted civil-military divide in Islamabad’s approach to its volatile neighbour.

Afghan Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid openly accused Pakistan’s army of deliberately undermining peace by bypassing Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s government, escalating tensions with Kabul to serve its strategic interests, reported India Today in an incisive article.

A central revelation from the recent, largely inconclusive peace talks was confirmation that US drones are routinely striking targets inside Afghanistan, using Pakistani airspace with Islamabad’s tacit acquiescence. Taliban officials allege that even as Islamabad protested powerlessness, Pakistani military leaders allowed American drones passage due to prior agreements with the US, making Pakistan a facilitator in Washington’s Afghan operations.

Earlier this month, Pakistan launched airstrikes and artillery barrages deep into Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, targeting Kabul’s eastern outskirts and Paktika province.

This military retaliation killed scores of civilians, including women and children, and left at least 250 dead in border clashes during September and October. Despite rounds of talks in Qatar and Turkey, little substantive progress has emerged, deepening the cycle of violence and suspicion.

The dynamic described by Taliban officials is neither new nor surprising in Pakistan’s political landscape. Historically, Islamabad’s civilian administrations have often been marginalized when the military has pursued its own foreign and security policy—invariably prioritising military objectives over negotiated diplomacy. Field Marshal Asim Munir, Pakistan’s army chief, commands significant influence and has at times represented Pakistan in high-level meetings alongside, or even without, the civilian leadership.

Taliban spokesperson Mujahid argued the civilian government genuinely seeks cordial ties, but the military establishment sabotages efforts. Specific instances included sending Pakistan’s special envoy Sadiq Khan to Kabul for positive diplomatic engagements while military operations against Afghanistan were still underway. Mujahid drew parallels with Imran Khan’s tenure—when civilian leadership was more pronounced, relations were relatively stable, until his ousting by the military-supported establishment.

The reopening of the US-Afghanistan military corridor through Pakistani airspace underscores complex regional dynamics. Notably, former US President Donald Trump reportedly sought operational control over Afghanistan’s Bagram airbase, heightening Kabul’s concerns about renewed American military involvement, facilitated by Pakistan’s military.

The roots of Afghanistan-Pakistan mistrust are historic, stemming from the 1947 Durand Line division of Pashtun tribes. Subsequent decades saw Islamabad supporting anti-Soviet mujahideen—with American backing—only for Pakistan to later face terrorist blowback. Since 2001, Pakistan has played a double game, supporting the US while sheltering Taliban leadership.

Presently, Islamabad blames Kabul for shielding Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) militants, responsible for frequent attacks in Pakistan. Afghanistan, meanwhile, condemns Pakistan for forcibly deporting Afghan refugees and repeated deadly airstrikes, most recently in March and December 2024.

The latest events starkly illustrate how Pakistan’s army still calls the shots in shaping Afghan policy, subordinating the civilian government even as it faces mounting domestic and international scrutiny. This ongoing military primacy, combined with external factors such as US drone activity and persistent border clashes, continues to jeopardise prospects for lasting peace in the region.